Re: scm_wrong_num_args

From:

Marius Vollmer

Subject:

Re: scm_wrong_num_args

Date:

25 Mar 2001 03:34:53 +0200

User-agent:

Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.7

Dirk Herrmann <address@hidden> writes:
> Would it be allright to call this function scm_error_num_args_subr?
What about scm_error_wrong_num_args_subr?
> I feel that (in an arbitrary long term) it would be nice to have
> guile's error reporting functions named scm_error_*. Do people
> agree with me?
Consistency is always a good thing. I feel the whole error reporting
machinery needs to be checked for consistency, and before starting to
change the names only, we should probably first see whether there is
more to clean up.